This is pretty much like McCarthyism in the 1950’s and is just about as effective. Nothing more than political theatre... While Wolf makes a big deal about documents in the public domain for years is the political equivalent of the “Dutch boy placing his finger in the dike to stop a leak”. China has no interest in attacking the U.S. and has no need to. They have already won the economic war with the complicit traitor- corporations that enabled the transfer of wealth to them and have no allegiance to the U.S. only to their stakeholders...

Sensitive technologies such as Kryton switches still get out without the aid of the NTRS...

Anyway, this thread really belongs on the space policy thread...

Logged

“All engineering experiments generate valuable data, the failures are the ones that yield the most”Rob

You mean our government sold out to the Chinese decades ago.. there's still plenty of China "paranoia" in the mining industry (aka, the industry in Australia).

Quite the opposite!

Logged

"There is nobody who is a bigger fan of sending robots to Mars than me... But I believe firmly that the best, the most comprehensive, the most successful exploration will be done by humans" Steve Squyres

data is unclassified or classified. Unclassified means anyone can see it.

Classified information means it is not revealable to people who have a need to know. There are several levels of classification:

For Official Use Only. This means while it may not be terribly classified, its dissemination is generally limited to those who have a need for it.

in the US, we have Confidential, Secret, and Top Secret. They all have different restrictions on who can see it. And just because you have a security clearence, does not mean you can see anything that is within your clearence rating. There are several other sub categories I will not go into.

I assume that NASA contractors with access to information have to sign something that says they will take what they've seen to the grave.

I am by no means an expert, but. Classified documents mean that it doesn't matter who you are, you are required to have a certain security clearance to view that specific document.

ITAR on the other hand is an entirely different animal. It has ill-defined boundaries (at least to the common engineer) and more so can be much more far reaching. ITAR covers entire "kinds" of information as opposed to classification that is applied to specific items.

For example, something that is commonly covered under ITAR is how problems with rockets are solved. This is why SpaceX had to submit their failure analysis document about the Merlin 1C engine failure to the U.S. State Department so they could get it cleared for release and to check for ITAR restricted information. Even though all the information may be owned by a company, if the type of information is ITAR covered they can't show it to non U.S. Citizens. If SpaceX employed non U.S. Citizens for example they would be forbidden from even seeing internal memos that talked about the failure analysis.

Certain large aerospace companies that accept non-U.S. citizen interns for example have to basically "segregate" the non-U.S. Citizen employees away from the main workforce and have them work on other projects because of ITAR.

I don't have access to ITAR restricted documents myself, but from my understanding once you join a company, not much is required to be shown to get access to ITAR restricted information. It basically just requires proof of U.S. Citizenship from my understanding.

As a personal example. At our university we were using a certain GPS unit for cubesats that had its altitude and speed limits unlocked. That makes it covered under ITAR. The problem is that this GPS unit was manufactured in Canada and despite the fact that it was manufactured in Canada and unlocked in Canada, we couldn't ask for tech support from them on their own product because we would be talking about ITAR restricted information to a group outside the country.

Because of all this it begins to become obvious why so much satellite construction has started to move outside the U.S. because of the hassle of dealing with these restrictions.

No, it's not that bad at all compared to what could happen. NASA is under no "requirement" to put all that stuff online.

Yes it is. A requirement from me, a taxpayer, to have access to the research that I have helped pay for.

Wolf does not fund NASA, /I/ (and the rest of the American people) fund NASA. NASA is not Wolf's plaything.

Quote

Can you do the same for many other government agencies?

Yes. NIH publishes all its funded research online. The Executive Branch is pushing for all non-classified research to be published freely online, so the American people have access to what they are paying for.

I could not agree more here my tax dollars helped pay for this research I have a right to view it. Wolf's actions are just brainless.But then I seen his talks on other subjects the man at best can be described as an arrogant and stubborn dullard.Seriously Wolf should step down and retire he's doing nothing but harm here.

I could not agree more here my tax dollars helped pay for this research I have a right to view it.

Sadly not true (a moral right perhaps, a legal right no). You have a right to vote for politicians who will pass open-access laws to give you that right.(as well as pushing for a broader pushback against the national-security/TSA state). But so far, this hasn't become an election issue.

My understanding is that the retrospective application of ITAR to all the space stuff we love is a result of the Loral/Long March fiasco of the 1990s. But having read some of the details of that I remain unconvinced the tech transfer in that case really helped the Chinese military - and did something really change between the Cold War and now, or were we making a huge mistake in the 1960s when we published this stuff in journals, or at least put declassified technical notes in public access places like the MIT library?

The idea that a document can be unclassified but you can't legally take itout of the country seems profoundly unrealistic in the 21st century. Either it is out in the public, in which case visiting foreign nationals will see it (and ftp it home if needed) or it is not, and therefore 'secret' in the generic sense of the word, whether the US govt has labelled it 'unclassified' or not.

{snip}My understanding is that the retrospective application of ITAR to all the space stuff we love is a result of the Loral/Long March fiasco of the 1990s. But having read some of the details of that I remain unconvinced the tech transfer in that case really helped the Chinese military - and did something really change between the Cold War and now, or were we making a huge mistake in the 1960s when we published this stuff in journals, or at least put declassified technical notes in public access places like the MIT library?

At the end of the Second World War basic rocket technology that works was obtained by both the Russians and the Americans from the Germans. So during the Cold War the USA only needed to hide details of implementation of that technology from the Communists to prevent them from working out counter measures.

In the 21st century countries like Iran, Iraq, North Korea and South Korea are developing military rockets. The USA has decided to make this difficult. This may involve hiding information that the Russians and Germans knew.

Anyone want to take bets/do a poll on how long it takes to get NTRS back online? With 300,000+ documents, I'm guessing that they'll either back down from reviewing everything, or we're talking over a year.

I wish there was some way to vote against id10t congresspeople in other states.

Anyone want to take bets/do a poll on how long it takes to get NTRS back online? With 300,000+ documents, I'm guessing that they'll either back down from reviewing everything, or we're talking over a year.

I wish there was some way to vote against id10t congresspeople in other states.

~Jon

There is. Political contributions to their opponents, both primaries and general elections.

Logged

Chris Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

There is. Political contributions to their opponents, both primaries and general elections.

And is there a guarantee that the opponent is any better?

There is if you're rich enough to pick the opponent!

Off topic, though....

Logged

Chris Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Sadly not true (a moral right perhaps, a legal right no). You have a right to vote for politicians who will pass open-access laws to give you that right.(as well as pushing for a broader pushback against the national-security/TSA state). But so far, this hasn't become an election issue.

My understanding is that the retrospective application of ITAR to all the space stuff we love is a result of the Loral/Long March fiasco of the 1990s. But having read some of the details of that I remain unconvinced the tech transfer in that case really helped the Chinese military - and did something really change between the Cold War and now, or were we making a huge mistake in the 1960s when we published this stuff in journals, or at least put declassified technical notes in public access places like the MIT library?

The idea that a document can be unclassified but you can't legally take itout of the country seems profoundly unrealistic in the 21st century. Either it is out in the public, in which case visiting foreign nationals will see it (and ftp it home if needed) or it is not, and therefore 'secret' in the generic sense of the word, whether the US govt has labelled it 'unclassified' or not.

I could not agree more on pushing back the TSA /security state in some ways it has done more damage then the attacks themselves did.

It's partly responsible for the debt situation but police state governments in general tend to be in debt.